[12808] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Yes folks, this is not a joke
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lyle_Seaman@transarc.com)
Sun May 29 19:38:52 1994
Date: Sun, 29 May 1994 08:38:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: Lyle_Seaman@transarc.com
To: com-priv@psi.com, Miles R Fidelman <fidelman@civicnet.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9405281051.A8456-0100000@world.std.com>
Miles R Fidelman <fidelman@civicnet.org> writes:
> Any bets as to whether or not we'd have the Internet today without
> Federal funding of: ...
One thing's for certain -- we'd have USENET. I'm confident that we'd
have some sort of large internetwork today without all that government
funding. We wouldn't call it Internet, of course, and it probably
wouldn't be as large as it now is, and it might well be more
centralized, but I'm sure it would exist.
> You might also ask if we'd have an air transport system today if:
>
> i. the Federal government hadn't given birth to the aircraft industry
> with lots of warplane purchases between World Wars I and II
We had an air transport system before WWI. Not very big, but it was
still brand-new.
> ii. Federal airmail business providing a stable base for commercial
> airlines to build their freight and passenger businesses
As long as people and businesses want to ship freight, it doesn't
matter whether the Feds coordinate the deliveries. Federal Express
and UPS own their own airlines...
> And for that matter, do you think the service is better and safer now
> that we have airline deregulation
I can't quantify "better" very well, and I don't have the figures
handy for "safer", but I am 100% certain of this: If not for
deregulation, I would not have been able to afford to fly to my
brother-in-law's wedding. I would not have been able to afford to fly
to see my grandfather when he had emergency bypass surgery. I would
not have be able to fly to visit my parents, or my in-laws. (the
effects on the economy due to the increased mobility of the labor
force are left as an excercise for the reader)
> (and is an investment in airline stock a better bet today)?
Man oh man - was someone here talking about "elitism"? About the
"great unwashed"? "Is an investment in airline stock a better
bet...?" Miles, let me tell you, practically no one believes that the
purpose of government regulation is to provide profits for investors.
Anyone who believes otherwise is a crook. The great unwashed are
not interested in investing in airline stocks, anyway -- they're
interested in cheap flights to watch Nancy Kerrigan march down Main
Street (TM). And now they've got 'em.
---
Lyle Transarc 707 Grant Street
412 338 4474 The Gulf Tower Pittsburgh 15219
"Gossip is what makes the world go round. I have very few secrets.
I would be deeply concerned if a device were marketed that could stop
interception..." Emma Nicholson, MP.
